Single UI Input Routing Across Dual Processors for Critical Radio Functions

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Portable communication devices used in public safety environments face challenges in managing user-selectable features across different operating platforms, particularly during power-up conditions, where mission-critical communications must take priority over non-mission critical features, and providing an improved user interface for increased awareness.

Innovation Solution

A portable communication device with a converged architecture using a primary processor for mission-critical functions and secondary processors for non-mission critical functions, where a single user interface control determines processing based on user input extensions, such as button press durations, to route requests seamlessly between processors, ensuring priority and providing user feedback.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If multiple user selectable features running on different platforms are incorporated, then device functionality is expanded, but input routing management becomes complex and prioritization challenges arise

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice functionalityVSAvoidinput routing management
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces an input routing manager as an intermediary component that receives user inputs and determines whether to route them to the primary processor or secondary processor based on current operational state. This mediator resolves the complexity by centralizing routing logic rather than requiring each processor to independently handle all input scenarios.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent segments the processing architecture into distinct primary and secondary processors, each handling specific types of features. The primary processor manages mission-critical functions while the secondary processor handles non-mission-critical features, allowing independent management and reducing overall system complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Adaptability or versatility

If non-mission critical features are added to expand functionality, then device versatility increases, but reliability of mission critical communications may be compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice versatilityVSAvoidmission critical communications
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by assigning different priority levels and handling characteristics to different processors. The primary processor is dedicated exclusively to mission-critical communications with highest priority, while the secondary processor handles non-critical features with lower priority, ensuring that critical functions are never compromised by non-critical operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The input routing manager acts as a mediator that evaluates each user input against current system state and processor availability, routing inputs to appropriate processors while ensuring mission-critical communications maintain priority. This intermediary layer prevents non-critical features from interfering with critical operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Device complexity

If a single user interface control is used for both processors, then device complexity is reduced, but user awareness of selected features decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice complexityVSAvoiduser awareness
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements feedback mechanisms that provide users with information about which processor is currently handling inputs and what features are active. This feedback maintains user awareness despite the simplified single-control interface, as users can see which processor responds to their inputs and understand the current operational state.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

4Reliability

If different processors are used for mission critical and non-mission critical functions, then functional independence is improved, but input routing determination becomes more difficult

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefunctional independenceVSAvoidinput routing determination
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The input routing manager serves as a dedicated intermediary that handles the complexity of input routing determination. It monitors processor availability, feature states, and input types to make intelligent routing decisions, freeing the processors themselves from complex routing logic and maintaining functional independence.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentEP4049133B1Method and apparatus for managing feature based user input routing in a multi-processor architecture using single user interface control
Publication Date: 2024.03.13 MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INC
  • EP4049133B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4049133B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4049133B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

Improved management of feature based user input routing in a multi-processor architecture is provided. A portable communication device comprises a primary processor controlling a primary operating system, a secondary processor controlling a secondary operating system, and a user interface input control operatively coupled to the primary processor. The user interface input control is configured to enable a radio function and a secondary user input extension associated therewith. The primary processor selectively determines processing of a radio function by one of the primary and secondary processors based on activation of the user interface input control in conjunction with the user input interface extension